Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:26:20 +0300
Message-ID: <87ptfw5oqb.wl@drakkar.ibe.miee.ru>
From: Samium Gromoff <deepfire@ibe.miee.ru>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Arch Users Mailing List <gnu-arch-users@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: kernel.bkbits.net off the air
In-Reply-To: <20031113144454.GA2502@delft.aura.cs.cmu.edu>
References: <87r80c5sqp.wl@drakkar.ibe.miee.ru>
	<20031113144454.GA2502@delft.aura.cs.cmu.edu>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.10.1 (Watching The Wheels) SEMI/1.14.5 (Awara-Onsen) FLIM/1.14.5 (Demachiyanagi) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.3 (i386-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.5 - "Awara-Onsen")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2201
Lines: 55

At Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:44:54 -0500,
Jan Harkes wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 03:59:42PM +0300, Samium Gromoff wrote:
> > Okay, folks. Now i propose to go further than that.
> > 
> > I hope that Larry recognises that at some point the linux kernel community
> > _will_ switch to a free software alternative.
> > 
> > I think we should have a better choice than the lossy bk->cvs.
> > 
> > I propose we as a whole ask Larry to create a bk->arch gateway _not_ via cvs
> > but directly, and therefore using all the extended metadata possible.
> 
> I appreciate Arch and am actually using it for some things, and can't
> give an educated opinion on BK as I have never used it.
> 
> But this is just ridiculous.
> 
> First of all, there always serious pain in switching. Whatever free
> alternative is provided better be _a lot_ better compared to what is
> currently used. And although Arch might be more in-line with the
> political goals of many developers, frankly I don't believe Arch is
> technologically there yet.

You miss my point.

I don`t call for switching (although would like it to happen).

I call for a _better replacement for bk->cvs_.

bk->cvs loses data, which could be captured in a more sensible manner
than cvs is.
(I think that everyone agrees here that it`s not even remotely arguable)

bk->arch would regain that data back to our hands, thats what i`m proposing.
(here i presume that that data being constantly lost _is_ really useful)

> But then asking Larry to implement a gateway seems to be the plan of the
> century. Hey why doesn't Larry help out with the Arch or SVN effort
> while he's at it? How would you react if ClearCase started demanding
> that Arch/SVN/CVS developers should implement a one-directional
> gateway to their software to make it easier for people to migrate.

I decide to conveniently skip answering that part.
(That`s a suggestion to use your imagination here, really)

> Jan

regards, Samium Gromoff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/